The STAR TREK Superthread

[draynay]

One of the things that worked in TNG's favor was that they didn't try to shoehorn new characters into the roles of the old characters. So that "new Spock" is a pretty bad take from someone really oversimplifying things.

The only time they really failed in this regard was in season 2 where they tried to create an antagonistic relationship between the doctor and Data, a la McCoy & Spock. But while Spock was a sarcastic asshole who gave as good as he got, Data was so childlike and vulnerable that every Pulaski jab felt like she was cruelly punching down at someone incapable of defending himself.

[ravenmoon]

That's an Enterprise retcon of the Vulcans. In TOS and TNG, the Vulcans weren't assholes. They were legit wise and helpful.

ENT retconned the Vulcans into being high and mighty assholes dictating Earth's progress, though I think it actually began with Voyager with Tuvok.

Enterpriese feels a bit wasted too.. it w as always going to be a tough one to do, but.. what they didn't bank on is that much of the novel science had worn off because the same subjects had been treated in the other shows, especiallyt he original.

Doing an episode on transporter phobia was far less interesting on Enterprise than it was on the ToS, because for a lot of treekies, that stuff isn't new, and it just feels you are going over established ground, with nothing new to shine.

it's like a show for the most devoted of star trek so you get all the details of how your fave institutions and galaxy state in TNG-voyager period came to be.. but they must have thought with the added benefit of introducing trek to new audiences.

but by 2004, people expected a lot more shine from sic-fi - the planets and tech looks are all rather bland. if they had focused part on exploration and meeting superior aliens, and showing the true grit of humanity against tough odds in contrast to TNG and beyond era where humans have basically now pretty much the cutting edge leaders in tech.. then coupled it up with actually showing us alien worlds and alien civilization, putting more effort into sides of the star trek universe we never saw from the far ore ship/space orientated star treks' it would have done much better.

As a child/teen in 2004, you had much fancier and flashier stuff out there, you weren't going to break a new generation into trek with what they came up with in Enterprise.

But they have a chance to do so in Strange New Worlds, if they focus on the worlds.. Let Discovery now switch to exploring 31st century space combining some space travel with a mission to rebuild the federation, almost like a new take on showing its forming, but officially it's reforming, switching form it's sequential format.. which they say they are going to do.

Strange New Worlds, should be part space exploration, but more focused on the planets, and showing us cool stuff, the civilizations of our fave races properly, rather than the very crappy pics we saw in earlier shows.

This way when someone comes and watches the whole star trek franchise, they get some variation of theme throughout.

[Deadite]

So yea, every new Trek Show is always going to have a portion of old fans who outright will never like it from day one - because its new, and they don't want the change. Some of those shows come into their own and are seen as 'worthy' next generation shows, and some of those shows don't (or won't). Truly only time and hindsight will be the 'truth' when it comes to those shows.

And it means for the rest of us - to give things time 'to grow on us' and to get past the 'new' feeling before we jump on any immediate show-hating bandwagons after only the first episode or something. Yes, a show can be objectively bad of course - regardless of whether its new or not. But if you haven't even given yourself time to get over the resistance to the change, then you aren't giving a show (or anything else) the chance on its own.

Humans have many patterns - this is just one of them. (lol)

It has been 3 season for Discovery now. Me thinks that is plenty of time. If anything it is actually getting worse.

[Koriani]

It has been 3 season for Discovery now. Me thinks that is plenty of time. If anything it is actually getting worse.

Oh I didn't mean directly anything to do with Discovery. I was just more commenting on the "default human nature" of it all. And how its a pretty "standard" issue each time a new series (or new rebirth or new version of whatever xyz franchise) comes out and gets started.

If you gave a show half a season and didn't care for it - you've watched enough, move on! (lol)

If you don't like a show and you've given it 3 seasons - why? (not you btw, just a general statement) Unless one is into hate-tv watching, just watch something else.

I save my DISCO discussion for its own thread, where I already posted .

[Sunseeker]

It has been 3 season for Discovery now. Me thinks that is plenty of time. If anything it is actually getting worse.

Season 3(or the end of and the start of Season 4) were both turning points for TNG (Stewart had considered quitting the show until Best of Both Worlds) and Voyager(Scorpion). Arguably, the same could be said of DS9 where the show really started to build up the Domnion as ya know, a thing. And all of these shows had 26 hour-long episodes per season. Technically speaking, each of these shows were all on season "6" if they were counted in 13-episode intervals like DSC.

I'm not saying DSC will get better. I'm just saying we gave almost every other Trek far more time to prove themselves.

[Spaceboytg]

I'm not saying DSC will get better. I'm just saying we gave almost every other Trek far more time to prove themselves.

Another thing is that shows like DSC, PIC, WandaVision etc are all hampered by the fact that they are serialized, season-long arc shows. Individual episodes don't tend to retain the watchability of shows like TNG where you can just watch an episode at random and be entertained by that episodes story without being aware of where it fits in the seasons storyline.

This is why, I feel, shows like LD and Mandalorian are better received ... although they do contain ongoing stories those plotlines are typically referenced at the start of an episode to "set the scene" and then the episode itself is a self-contained story that you can watch irrespective of where it falls in the season.

It's not that one is "bad" or another is "better", it's just different storytelling devices that can cloud the perception of a show.

[Sunseeker]

Another thing is that shows like DSC, PIC, WandaVision etc are all hampered by the fact that they are serialized, season-long arc shows. Individual episodes don't tend to retain the watchability of shows like TNG where you can just watch an episode at random and be entertained by that episodes story without being aware of where it fits in the seasons storyline.

This is why, I feel, shows like LD and Mandalorian are better received ... although they do contain ongoing stories those plotlines are typically referenced at the start of an episode to "set the scene" and then the episode itself is a self-contained story that you can watch irrespective of where it falls in the season.

It's not that one is "bad" or another is "better", it's just different storytelling devices that can cloud the perception of a show.

Absolutely. It's a double-edged sword of this style of programming. You can jump right in to season-long arcs, but you miss out on what the show had to build up and develop by wading through seasons of episodic garbage. Previous Trek's had to "prove themselves" to earn season-long arcs by having "Random alien encounter" episode. "random disease" episode. "Spatial anomaly" episode. "pointless romantic triangle" episode. "character argues with the captain then does something stupid and learns a lesson" episode. Until there were finally enough recurring viewers that the Networks thought people would pay attention to any plot that lasted for more than 5 minutes.

Shows will learn over time. Mando is a good sign of that. Pull back a little from the "grand story arcs" but keep an underlying arc running in the background beyond "explore new worlds" in order to keep it all tied together.

I will also add this is an issue of "shrinking seasons", DSC has only been given 39 episodes. By the end of season 3, TNG, VOY and DS9 had 78.

IMO, it really doesn't matter if DSC was episodic or not. DSC barely has more than one and a half seasons of standard Trek, it quite literally doesn't have the episodes to be anything at all.

[Beloren]

I have a question,.. is the Star trek EU still canon? or was it over written like Disney did with star wars?

If I picked up star trek novels, do they faithfully follow further adventures told beyond the tv series? Or are they riddled with conflicts from stuff that came after?

I really want to know what happened to Voyager after the show ended, to me the last episode seemed so abrupt - and all of a sudden they were home and the Borg were defeated.. great finale, but really want to know what happens after. Are there books that tell more stories around the voyager crew? Are they canon? does Picard retcon any of that stuff?

Also where do the JJ Abrams movies stand? Are they an separate continuum or in the main universe as some sort of parallel multi verse thing? or it happened and then got undone or whatever ? Any explanations out there or have they just left it blank.?

[Ringthane]

I have a question,.. is the Star trek EU still canon? or was it over written like Disney did with star wars?

If I picked up star trek novels, do they faithfully follow further adventures told beyond the tv series? Or are they riddled with conflicts from stuff that came after?

I really want to know what happened to Voyager after the show ended, to me the last episode seemed so abrupt - and all of a sudden they were home and the Borg were defeated.. great finale, but really want to know what happens after. Are there books that tell more stories around the voyager crew? Are they canon? does Picard retcon any of that stuff?

Also where do the JJ Abrams movies stand? Are they an separate continuum or in the main universe as some sort of parallel multi verse thing? or it happened and then got undone or whatever ? Any explanations out there or have they just left it blank.?

As far as I'm aware, the novels and things are not canon (except when Roddenberry or the show's producers would say they were). So the only real canon we have is what's in the TV shows and movies. Which means the JJ Abrams movies would be canon, since Spock from the prime universe is in them as himself. But anything not on screen is not. That may have changed in the last few years, but that's the way it's been for decades.

[Sunseeker]

I have a question,.. is the Star trek EU still canon? or was it over written like Disney did with star wars?

If I picked up star trek novels, do they faithfully follow further adventures told beyond the tv series? Or are they riddled with conflicts from stuff that came after?

I really want to know what happened to Voyager after the show ended, to me the last episode seemed so abrupt - and all of a sudden they were home and the Borg were defeated.. great finale, but really want to know what happens after. Are there books that tell more stories around the voyager crew? Are they canon? does Picard retcon any of that stuff?

Also where do the JJ Abrams movies stand? Are they an separate continuum or in the main universe as some sort of parallel multi verse thing? or it happened and then got undone or whatever ? Any explanations out there or have they just left it blank.?

Generally speaking, all novels in Trek are regarded as non-canon and they always have been.

[Spaceboytg]

Generally speaking, all novels in Trek are regarded as non-canon and they always have been.

Yep, non-canon. Some of them are fantastic stories though and serve to make for great head-canon, filling in some of the blanks sometimes. I love the Kobayashi Maru novel, telling the stories of various TOS bridge officers attempts at the no-win scenario.

As for the Kelvin-verse movies, those are most definitely canon ... but an alternate reality. Discovery referenced them in season 3, in fact.

[ravenmoon]

Klingons vs Jemnhada vs Haroshians (hunter aliens from voyager) [spelling is all wrong] - who would win ?

[draynay]

Klingons vs Jemnhada vs Haroshians (hunter aliens from voyager) [spelling is all wrong] - who would win ?

Hirogen & Jem'Hadar is the spelling.

Victory is Life, the Jem'Hadar win.

[Deadite]

I'm not saying DSC will get better. I'm just saying we gave almost every other Trek far more time to prove themselves.

True enough but every other Trek series had me hooked on the first season. Voyager was a bit yikers for the first couple of seasons but even that had enough good eps to keep me watching. I watched season one of Discovery since it was Star Trek even after they ruined the Klingons. Season two was ok mainly due to everyone who wasn't a normal member of the Discovey crew. Seaon three was a total joke. Gave up after the one they went after the seed ship. When the guys family was dead and instead of getting the whatever her name was to talk the guy around since she was the same species they literally said NO!! It has to be Burnham!! Only Burnham!!!

[Beloren]

So finished Enterprise tis week, and finally started watching STO, have lots of thoughts about it

So far I'm 3 episodes in, it kinda feels like a mild horror/twilight zone where sometihng scary and awful is just on the horizon - even though kirk saves the day.

The stories are actually pretty well written, surprisingly so, plots are engaging adn they wrap you in.

It's interesting to see where many of hte things you see in later star trek shows come from, it's like everything so far that I've sene has been done multiple times on subsequent shows and relies heavily on this content.


The only thing that is off putting is how antiquate d it all looks. Love the charm of the era.. the 40s to 70s was a different era to what we are use to, covid has definitely marked the end of the 80s-10s , so I wonder if star trek original should be remastered or they should do reboot STO.


The JJ movies, I actually quite liked, so I guess they work as a sort of reboot, can you imagine a series using those sets?

[Spaceboytg]

So finished Enterprise tis week, and finally started watching STO, have lots of thoughts about it

Are you meaning TOS (The Original Series)? Because STO is Star Trek Online.

I grew up on TOS, not sure how much I'd enjoy it now though. I feel like it might really feel dated.

[Beloren]

Are you meaning TOS (The Original Series)? Because STO is Star Trek Online.

I grew up on TOS, not sure how much I'd enjoy it now though. I feel like it might really feel dated.

yes I meant TOS .. I'm only now watching it for the first time.

[Frontenac]

One of the things that worked in TNG's favor was that they didn't try to shoehorn new characters into the roles of the old characters. So that "new Spock" is a pretty bad take from someone really oversimplifying things.

The only time they really failed in this regard was in season 2 where they tried to create an antagonistic relationship between the doctor and Data, a la McCoy & Spock. But while Spock was a sarcastic asshole who gave as good as he got, Data was so childlike and vulnerable that every Pulaski jab felt like she was cruelly punching down at someone incapable of defending himself.

True. But even then Pulaski's jabs were pretty mild compared to McCoy's jabs at Spock's Vulcan part. Still, that lack of conflict of character between, err, characters was a problem to me. It made the show too "clean", too nice. I've always liked the conflict between Quark and Odo in DS9, or the tension between Tuvok and Neelix in Voyager. They could have done something somewhat similar between Data and Troi, a character who could not feel emotions at all vs a character who could feel others' emotions. Or between Worf and Troi, who are two cultural opposites. Riker and Picard are two characters who could have clashed a little more. They tried something like that between Ro and Riker (then again, Ro came into conflict with almost everyone), but since Ro was a secondary character, that conflict was not well developed and Ro left the show.

- - - Updated - - -

Hirogen & Jem'Hadar is the spelling.

Victory is Life, the Jem'Hadar win.

On their own, the Jem'Hadar lose badly. That ketracel-white thing is hard to get without the Vorta. The Klingons would win if they survive the initial onslaught. The Hirogen are too divided to pose any threat.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

It's interesting to see where many of hte things you see in later star trek shows come from, it's like everything so far that I've sene has been done multiple times on subsequent shows and relies heavily on this content.

This is what I think is the problem with Star Trek after TNG. TOS and TNG basically did all of the episodic plots that could be thought of. The episodic plots of (the first half of) DS9, Voyager, and ENT were usually rehashes of stuff TOS and TNG already did. I think that after TNG, the Star Trek franchise needed to find a way to reinvent itself. DS9 succeeded at that by moving to a more serialized story about the conflict between the Federation and the Dominion. Voyager and ENT had the potential to do that with their setups (lost in space for Voyager, early days of spaceflight for ENT), but wasted those setups and defaulted back to rehashing TOS and TNG episodic plots, which is why I thought those two series (VOY and ENT) were overall meh.

The JJ movies, I actually quite liked, so I guess they work as a sort of reboot, can you imagine a series using those sets?

Isn't that just Discovery, though? I-pod store sets and lensflares?

- - - Updated - - -

True. But even then Pulaski's jabs were pretty mild compared to McCoy's jabs at Spock's Vulcan part. Still, that lack of conflict of character between, err, characters was a problem to me. It made the show too "clean", too nice.

This emphasis on "there must be conflict between characters!" seems to be an oddly western specific thing to me, I've noticed. Japanese anime/manga/JRPGs and Korean dramas don't really have conflict between the main characters, I've seen, but it seems that Western shows and stories are obsessed with it. Personally I find it obnoxious.

Riker did disagree with Picard a lot, but Riker would simply note that to Picard and then get on with carrying out his orders. I would have been bothered if Riker was constantly going "nope you're wrong captain let's obstruct getting the job done" every other episode.

[Frontenac]

This emphasis on "there must be conflict between characters!" seems to be an oddly western specific thing to me, I've noticed. Japanese anime/manga/JRPGs and Korean dramas don't really have conflict between the main characters, I've seen, but it seems that Western shows and stories are obsessed with it. Personally I find it obnoxious.

Riker did disagree with Picard a lot, but Riker would simply note that to Picard and then get on with carrying out his orders. I would have been bothered if Riker was constantly going "nope you're wrong captain let's obstruct getting the job done" every other episode.

Let's be clear: when I say "conflict", I do not mean necessarily hostility. There was a tension between Spock and McCoy, but they still respected each other and worked together. People have different characters. It is normal that some would rub the others off the wrong way. O'Brien could not stand Bashir in the beginning. They ended up as best "bros". Neelix annoyed Tuvok to no end, yet they would work together if need be. I absolutely loved the banter between Stamets and Reno in the last season of Discovery. These conflicts of personalities infuse a dose of realism and an interesting dynamic to the show.